Rosberg "F1 is a complete different sport this days"

Cars that are running close to each other are setting close to the same times - what a shocker! Drivers having to decide when to push and when not to - based on the circumstance they find themselves in...Kimi trying to two stop and burning up his tires and getting passed by the three stopper cars...oh the HORROR!

It's the same for everybody. It's good for F1...I dare you to go look at the complaints about F1 from like 2001 to 2006...everyone crying about how processional F1 had become...DRS is an invention of the TWG which is the teams, not the FIA...these tires come from all the complaining in the past about no overtaking...well now you got what you want and your complaining. It's the same for everyone...adapt or lose to the teams that get on with it and figure it out - it's that simple.

I never complained myself,I was a Montoya fan and he wasn't shy when it came to overtaking and I don't feel sorry for the guys that don't posses the skill,also the chase is more exciting to me than the actual pass,lap after lap hunter vs prey in a relentless pursuit,I also love good hard defending and don't understand the need of 80 meaningless/fake overtakes a race I'd rather have 25 real ones like it's always been.

Now all the thrills are gone,tires won't let you chase/pursuit,DRS has turned overtaking into a formality and defending along with it.I have no idea who was complaining in 2001-06 but I'm sure it was NONE Ferrari fans being tired of domination. I hated the fact as well but NEVER the Racing itself,NEVER.What would I give for a Schumacher-Montoya duel about now.

And what do you teach the young generation of Karting with aspirations of being F1 drivers? Being fast,a good overtaker or defender doesn't matter now because in F1 the most important skill is looking after your tires.

It has been said endlessly that you can't cure cancer with aspirin,which F1 has been trying for years and we have this current circus as a result.

Some people say races were processional before? OK, what you expect? It is F1 and we have Qualification with one purpose only, to put fastest on top and from there to the slowest one! So, again ,what you expect? Of course when fastest guys start first they will leave the rest behind. Somebody will form train. There will be small numbers overtakes , but quality ones. Now we have overtakes by kilogram. Effortless cruising around slower cars. Nobody talk about talent anymore. Why to talk about it, according Pirelli we have engineer war which is good for the show??? Is that Hembrey man crazy? I want drivers war only, I don't care who have the best tyre engineer. This guy never say that drivers will be able to push 100% again. According to him we need to adapt to the shit they are serving us. To adapt to the WWE F1.

Actually plenty of people are talking about the most talented grid possibly ever.

It's only a vocal minority that is displeased because the order of the top teams appears to have been shook up a bit with the new tyres and rules. You always have to adapt to the rules and the tyres, and the cream rises to the top. There is plenty of talented drivers doing extremely well.

Actually plenty of people are talking about the most talented grid possibly ever.

It's only a vocal minority that is displeased because the order of the top teams appears to have been shook up a bit with the new tyres and rules. You always have to adapt to the rules and the tyres, and the cream rises to the top. There is plenty of talented drivers doing extremely well.

Oh we have amazing drivers.. really fantastic. One of the best lineups ever at the top of the pile (Schumi, Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Button, Raikonnen, thats a hell of a group). Some of us feel we are not able to see them really doing their best though which is a shame.

Oh we have amazing drivers.. really fantastic. One of the best lineups ever at the top of the pile (Schumi, Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Button, Raikonnen, thats a hell of a group). Some of us feel we are not able to see them really doing their best though which is a shame.

That would be a shame, but I'm not certain the argument that they are all cruising around is as strong as some appear to think.

Tyre delta and fuel delta are hardly the same. You see, to put it simply, while there is a fuel gauge on the car's dashboards, I'm not aware of the existance of a similar "tyre gauge". Besides, back in 1986 Berger won a GP on the same brand of tyres as is used nowadays, only that back then this manufacturer had a magic recipe which allowed a driver to use a single set of tyres and WIN.

Berger won because he was on a combination of hard and soft tyres, something that's impossible to do now. Not to mention a tyre war in progress.

Fuel gauges back then weren't perfect and there were a few cases where a car was reading empty when a driver was leading a race with a few laps to go, yet still had enough fuel in the tank.

The comparison with 1986's fuel and 2012's tyres is valid. Both require a driving style that doesn't call for pushing 100% of the time.

I never complained myself,I was a Montoya fan and he wasn't shy when it came to overtaking and I don't feel sorry for the guys that don't posses the skill,also the chase is more exciting to me than the actual pass,lap after lap hunter vs prey in a relentless pursuit,I also love good hard defending and don't understand the need of 80 meaningless/fake overtakes a race I'd rather have 25 real ones like it's always been.

Now all the thrills are gone,tires won't let you chase/pursuit,DRS has turned overtaking into a formality and defending along with it.I have no idea who was complaining in 2001-06 but I'm sure it was NONE Ferrari fans being tired of domination. I hated the fact as well but NEVER the Racing itself,NEVER.What would I give for a Schumacher-Montoya duel about now.

And what do you teach the young generation of Karting with aspirations of being F1 drivers? Being fast,a good overtaker or defender doesn't matter now because in F1 the most important skill is looking after your tires.

It has been said endlessly that you can't cure cancer with aspirin,which F1 has been trying for years and we have this current circus as a result.

I'm certainly with you on this.

It's really not good that Schumi would feel unsatisfied driving a race because he has to excessively hold back his pace in the interest of tyre preservation. This is all relative since Schumi himself has managed tyres during stints in his glory years. It's not about having to manage tyres but more specifically, about the EXTENT to which such management retards potential pace/performance.

This is WWE stuff now from the driving POV. It's literally no different. One driver overtakes another and it looks great as a good kick in the face on WWE. However, a genuine pass didn't really occur. Both are rigged to look good and both have stadiums full of rabid fans loving it.

This is sort of sad. I didn't realize so many F1 fans that post to groups as this would be this way about it. Maybe, this is so because it's Schumi who criticized the current status quo.

Schumi agreed with Damon Hill back in 1999 about the numbness of driving on grooved tyres and how to affected a driver's abiity to push. But Schumi never continued this line of thought when he started winning back to back titles.

I remember a lot of times the drivers would go for a second flying lap on the same set on the Bridgestones and even set a faster lap than the previous one.These tires simply do not last more than a lap,so we've NEVER had this and it is new,as we've never had tires this bad.

Sure, that happened occasionally but it was generally because of the warm up phase. With any tyre the best performace will be gained from the first lap that tyres are up to temperature. We do see drivers run the same set of tyres for second flying laps these days it is just that they tend to use them in different sessions e.g using a tyre for a first run in Q2 that was already used in Q1. We also have to account for the fact that the much more limited tyre allocations these days mean that tyres used in qualifying also have to be used in the race, which is a big departure from the 'golden age'.

Yes I do and would pay to see it,3-4 Quali laps say in Japan on the SS tires. Guarantee it will either melt,blow or come off the wheels with best case scenario being down to the canvas.

Why? It is a tyre that is funadmentally unsuitable for a track like Suzuka. We did see cars run with the supersoft at testing in Barcelona and the degradation rate was, not surprisingly, very high. There wasn't much evidence of "melting" though.

You accused me of selective cherry picking yet you're choosing the car that was in clean air and we're aware now how that's an advantage on the tires.I say look at your chart from 4th on down and you'll see the similarities and the delta Schu was speaking of.

Form 4th downwards?

Webber 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38'sRosberg 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38'sdi Resta 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:38'sAlonso 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38'sHamilton 1st stint, most laps in the 1:40's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38's

Do I need to continue?Times up and down the field improved by around 1 second for each stint.

Schumi agreed with Damon Hill back in 1999 about the numbness of driving on grooved tyres and how to affected a driver's abiity to push. But Schumi never continued this line of thought when he started winning back to back titles.

What would Schumi or anyone else in his position do once the situation continues whether they like it or not? Either do it the current F1 way or go via the highway, right? There was a performance drop-off with the grooved tyres and with time, that performance was regained with advances in tyre compound/construction technology and improved downforce. Furthermore, the move to grooved tyres was in the interest of safety and with the full knowledge that performance will likely be regained. The same thing occurred with the move to the V8's. The cars were definitely less powerful and less wild-horselike in performance. However, Michael still found the new engine power and car feel interesting though less ferocious.

Importantly, back then, Michael was in the prime of his career and did hang around after such changes. Right now, he could well retire with things continuing as is. I doubt they will though. It's simply unacceptable considering the spirit intended. This isn't about slowing the cars for safety reasons. It's about creating artificial racing. Even Pirelli are conceding this indirectly:

"In Mugello, I suspect that the teams will spend a fair bit of time working on this, certainly the ones that feel that they have more to learn," Hembery told AUTOSPORT.

"From Barcelona on, you will start to see a slightly different and more measured approach.

"The engineers are the best you will ever find in the automotive world. They are exceptional and in two or three races they will have understood the challenge that they have in front of them and we won't be having this type of conversation [about tyres].

"Bahrain was a more extreme race because of the temperature. The majority of the races in the European season will be in the mid-range and people will be wondering what the fuss is about."

'Extreme race'? What does that mean? I thought things were great in Bahrain and nothing should be different. Michael is simply being a crybaby and nothing was at all wrong. Why such interest in a Mugello test to better understand tyres? Well, Pirelli and the FIA are likely approaching things in a gradual fashion. No hasty changes yet. Keep the tyres as they are and see if things IMPROVE if the teams are able to adapt. However, IF Bahrain type situations continue, we can expect that a change will come.

Schumi agreed with Damon Hill back in 1999 about the numbness of driving on grooved tyres and how to affected a driver's abiity to push. But Schumi never continued this line of thought when he started winning back to back titles.

Maybe that's because the tyres changed, became more durable, softer and allowed drivers to push more.....

This is F1, nothing remains the same.

Look at the lap time difference between 2000 and 2001 in the tyre war between Bridgestone and Michelin, differences of upto 4 seconds in some cases.

We've gone backwards, it seems more gimmicky and Pirelli ARE capable of producing better tyres which would further enhance the show. You will never - on these tyres anyway - see a Schumacher Suzuka 1998 charge or a Alonso-Schumacher Imola 2005 chase/battle again.

so Hamilton won 2 sec a lap with the track getting quicker and losing >100kg of fuel?doing 1m38s compared to 1m32s in qualyfing?

OK, now we can at least have a sensible discussion.

In 2012 Lewis Hamilton's fastest race lap was 1:37.733 compared to his quali lap of 1:32.520 - a difference of 5.2 secondsIn 2010 in Bahrain (different configuration), Lewis' fastest race lap was 1:59.560 compared to his quali lap of 1:54.707 - a difference of 4.8 seconds.

People often bring up Turkey 2010 and we see comments such as "we had 4 drivers pushing to the limit, lap after lap".Hamilton's fastest lap was, in fact, 3.6 seconds slower than his fastest quali lap during that race. That is a much higher differential than we saw with, for example, Button in Canada 2011.

When we take into account the free use of DRS in qualifying in 2012 as well as the compromise needed to the cars' gearing to accomodate DRS then a picture begins to develop. The picture is one of the cars pacing themselves considerably more in 2010 than those who have the romantic vision of the drivers having been 'balls out' from lap 1 seem to believe.

Maybe that's because the tyres changed, became more durable, softer and allowed drivers to push more.....

This is F1, nothing remains the same.

Look at the lap time difference between 2000 and 2001 in the tyre war between Bridgestone and Michelin, differences of upto 4 seconds in some cases.

We've gone backwards, it seems more gimmicky and Pirelli ARE capable of producing better tyres which would further enhance the show. You will never - on these tyres anyway - see a Schumacher Suzuka 1998 charge or a Alonso-Schumacher Imola 2005 chase/battle again.

That was ALL about tyres. Schumacher's Bridgestones were in much better shape than Alonso's Michelins in that last phase of the race.

Schumacher did his fastest lap of the race (1:21.8xx) on lap 48Alonso did his fastest lap of the race (1:23.1xx) on lap 22

During that last 8 or 9 laps, both drivers were doing high 1:24's and low 1:25's.

TBH, I don't see a lot of difference between that an what we saw with Vettel, Alonso and Button in Monaco last year.

Yeah. The "ignore" function may well be the brightest and most enjoyable idea ever implemented on internet forums - after the forums themselves, of course.

Personally I think ignoring people is a bit ... especially since he's just echoing what Gary Anderson said

It was also interesting to hear Mercedes' Michael Schumacher complain about the Pirelli tyres.

He is a professional racing driver, and it's all about looking after your tyres. You do that by getting the right balance on the car.

When I was involved with Bridgestone tyres with Jordan in the early 2000s, in the middle of the tyre war with Michelin, Schumacher and Ferrari had tyres we were not even allowed to look at.

They cost so much money that Bridgestone could not afford to supply them to everyone. And whenever we did have an opportunity to run a derivative of those tyres, our lap times were much, much better.

It's a bit sad that Michael now sees things the other way around, because a lot of his competitiveness in those days was down to the working relationship he and Ferrari had with Bridgestone, one to which nobody else had access.

Now there's a standard tyre, it's down to him and Mercedes to get it working properly, not point the finger at the supplier.

Berger won because he was on a combination of hard and soft tyres, something that's impossible to do now. Not to mention a tyre war in progress.

Fuel gauges back then weren't perfect and there were a few cases where a car was reading empty when a driver was leading a race with a few laps to go, yet still had enough fuel in the tank.

The comparison with 1986's fuel and 2012's tyres is valid. Both require a driving style that doesn't call for pushing 100% of the time.

Briefly: NO. 1. Of course it's possible now if it was possible 25 years ago. Oh, you mean "it goes against the regulations" and also "the manufacturer has zero intention of providing tyre sets that may last 300 kms at race pace?" It's not the same as "it's impossible".2. I'm not sure I've ever heard of any driver to simply stop a race car because a FUEL GAUGE indicated him to do so. 3. Conserving tyres in 2012 and conserving fuel in 1986 is not a valid comparison, perhaps you were thinking of engine management of teams with less than reliable engines [those that exploded if pushed above a RPM redline]?

Sure, that happened occasionally but it was generally because of the warm up phase. With any tyre the best performace will be gained from the first lap that tyres are up to temperature. We do see drivers run the same set of tyres for second flying laps these days it is just that they tend to use them in different sessions e.g using a tyre for a first run in Q2 that was already used in Q1. We also have to account for the fact that the much more limited tyre allocations these days mean that tyres used in qualifying also have to be used in the race, which is a big departure from the 'golden age'.

Why? It is a tyre that is funadmentally unsuitable for a track like Suzuka. We did see cars run with the supersoft at testing in Barcelona and the degradation rate was, not surprisingly, very high. There wasn't much evidence of "melting" though.

Form 4th downwards?

Webber 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38'sRosberg 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38'sdi Resta 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:38'sAlonso 1st stint, most laps in the 1:41's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38'sHamilton 1st stint, most laps in the 1:40's - 2nd stint most laps in the 1:40's - 3rd stint, most laps in the 1:39's - 4th stint, most laps in the 1:38's

Do I need to continue?Times up and down the field improved by around 1 second for each stint.

This is going nowhere,you can't convince me and I can't you.....but I will believe the drivers and all the evidence as well as what I see on track,it all points ========> way

“Formula One does seem to have slowed down. The cars are slower on a race distance. Last year we had to make tyres last with heavier fuel load and now it's even slower. I did run the other day and it was painfully slow, it really was. Just not exciting, to be honest,” “The first run - I didn't think I was pushing very hard - and the tyres were finished after nine laps, down to the canvas. On the next run, I had to go easier. It was almost like doing an out lap and just about made it to 15 or 16 on a soft tyre,” said Lewis.

Adrian Newey on Malaysia 2011:"We were trying to go as slow as we could to win the race......Seb in particular drove to the slowest pace that he could to conserve the tyres."

Mark Hughes...... but with the Pirellis the faster you went, the faster the tyre lost performance"And that's 2011

2012

Pirelli's motorsport director Paul Hembery said: "We have had to make changes and the objective of those changes is to make the racing closer.(He means FAKE)

Alan Permane:"Furthermore, the 2012-specification tyres are very sensitive to how they are treated in the early stages of their life - with degradation being much higher if the tyre is pushed very hard on its first lap.... when people put on new tyres to do set-up work, the tyres seemed to go away very quickly when you really try and hit the first lap. So if you do that in the race you will kill them for sure... no matter how much you look after them, you can only make them consistent for two or three laps and then they take a step"

Lotus team principal Eric Boullier told AUTOSPORT: "The tyres are going to make things very interesting. If you push too hard in qualifying then you are going to be screwed for the first part of the race

Schu:"I had to drive at a pace to manage the tyres to finish with tyres left over," he said. "We should question whether that should be the case."It's unsatisfying and not what a Formula 1 event should be."

And there was another driver who said last year they were only pushing 80% in 2011,Ricciardo I think?,can't find the thread it was on.

In 2012 Lewis Hamilton's fastest race lap was 1:37.733 compared to his quali lap of 1:32.520 - a difference of 5.2 secondsIn 2010 in Bahrain (different configuration), Lewis' fastest race lap was 1:59.560 compared to his quali lap of 1:54.707 - a difference of 4.8 seconds.

People often bring up Turkey 2010 and we see comments such as "we had 4 drivers pushing to the limit, lap after lap".Hamilton's fastest lap was, in fact, 3.6 seconds slower than his fastest quali lap during that race. That is a much higher differential than we saw with, for example, Button in Canada 2011.

When we take into account the free use of DRS in qualifying in 2012 as well as the compromise needed to the cars' gearing to accomodate DRS then a picture begins to develop. The picture is one of the cars pacing themselves considerably more in 2010 than those who have the romantic vision of the drivers having been 'balls out' from lap 1 seem to believe.

On the 40th lap of the set he was on,which means exactly he was pushing to the limit and getting faster and faster even on 40lap tires.Pirellis give you 2-3 laps of pushing* a set then get slower til they die 10 laps later.

Personally I think ignoring people is a bit ... especially since he's just echoing what Gary Anderson said

What Anderson (and a number of other people which, amongst other issues, have next to zero respect for other people's intelligence) said, can easily be simplified to "Schumacher is an idjit and a hypocritical overrated hack who knows nothing about F1 racing". I beg to differ.Oh and Rosberg backpedalling like a clown on a monocycle? Well he has to, he's looking to continue his career in F1 for more years than Schumi, so there are certain principles that he has to adhere to or be gone out of focus like yesterday's news.

What Anderson (and a number of other people which, amongst other issues, have next to zero respect for other people's intelligence) said, can easily be simplified to "Schumacher is an idjit and a hypocritical overrated hack who knows nothing about F1 racing". I beg to differ.Oh and Rosberg backpedalling like a clown on a monocycle? Well he has to, he's looking to continue his career in F1 for more years than Schumi, so there are certain principles that he has to adhere to or be gone out of focus like yesterday's news.

Yeah but still Anderson has probably forgotten more about F1 than all of us at this forum will ever learn, collectively. And he's talking about stuff he experienced first hand. Someone aligning with his views isn't that obscene to make them worthy of ignoring, thank god there's plenty of boring trolls here more worthy of our ignore lists.

Rosberg backpedaling? Do you have the quotes he is backpedaling from? Cause if you do I am afraid you will find he never really said anything negative, he said F1 is different than it used to be, which people here chose to interpret as negative. The rant came from Schumacher, not Rosberg.

But it really doesn't matter. What we're witnessing now is not some care about racing or F1 but blatant lobbying. Those kind of "behind the scenes" leaked opinions are part of it. As is media's attention and involvement of gullible public. Certain teams/drivers realized that they may have problems with the tyres and the process to put the pressure on tyre manufacturer to change them has begun.

"We were asked to come up with a certain approach, and that was agreed with teams," Hembery said. "The leader for the teams' views was actually Ross [Brawn], and he told us that Canada 2010 was the model they wanted and that is what we worked on."

so Hamilton won 2 sec a lap with the track getting quicker and losing >100kg of fuel?doing 1m38s compared to 1m32s in qualyfing?

Dunder should think this through again. Losing 150kg should give you much more than 2-3 sec in lap times. This only confirm that they are not pushing 100% and that F1 is already WWE. WWE makes for more happier team owners. All get part of the pie. They don't care if it is real or not. We are the one who are cheated and we pay the bill for it. No more money from me. I personally lost respect to many blogers, pundits. Of course they make money from this and can't speak against Pirelli (F1), but still they can't stop talking shit. They should stop selling pink glasses. Michael Schmidt the recent one. Garry Anderson knows better that us what real F1 is. Keith Collantine the same thing. I wouldn't be surprised if this guys write paid materials. And express the guy who pay opinion.

Rosberg backpedaling? Do you have the quotes he is backpedaling from? Cause if you do I am afraid you will find he never really said anything negative, he said F1 is different than it used to be, which people here chose to interpret as negative. The rant came from Schumacher, not Rosberg.

Rosberg said that he never pushed even for one lap in China. Tyre management only.

Dunder should think this through again. Losing 150kg should give you much more than 2-3 sec in lap times. This only confirm that they are not pushing 100% and that F1 is already WWE. I personally lost respect to many blogers, pundits. Of course they make money from this and can't speak against Pirelli , but still they can't stop talking shit. They should stop selling pink glasses. Michael Schmidt the recent one. Garry Anderson knows better that us what real F1 is. Keith Collantine the same thing. I wouldn't be surprise if this guys write paid materials.

There were happy with the tyres during pre-season testing and now that they seem to struggle, they want to change them...Anyway, if there is a concensus among the teams and drivers to modify the tyres then so be it, otherwise, struggling teams or drivers just have to get on with it.

What happy means? F1 is not held at Barcelona only. They were happy then, it was cold, tyres worked well if you drive them at 85,6% max. If you push over 95,3% in first 3 laps you lose 1,5 sec.

On a longer lap Bridgestones gave LESS of a laptime gain. Now why we all have to focus ONLY on what Hamilton could get in Bahrain 2012 and not the other drivers ...

I was talking about the examples Dunder give(for 5 drivers, not LH only). And I said 2-3 sec. I will check you data. Your Kimi data is not fair, his lap2 time was not representative for his real speed in first stint. Which was around 1:41 and 1:40.5. So Kimi was 3,9 sec. Not 5 sec. Pirelli were with 3 pitstops, how many were Bridgestone pitstops? One! So you can see why the drop in the lap times is similar. Also tyre compounds , very different. Pirelli are much faster(softer) tyres they will gain more time with burning the fuel. More than 2-3 sec we witness here. If I am not wrong time difference from empty to full was about 5-6 seconds?

I was talking about the examples Dunder give. And I said 2-3 sec. I will check you data. Your Kimi data is not fair, his lap2 time was not representative for his real speed in first stint. Which was around 1:41 and 1:40.5. So Kimi was 3,9 sec. Not 5 sec.

Please don't accuse me of cherry picking data, I chose 1 driver who was running in clean air (Vettel and Alonso) and one who wasn't (Raikkonen Hamilton)

There is no difference in speed, there just a difference in durability.

EDIT (To cover your edit)

Pirelli were with 3 pitstops, how many were Bridgestone pitstops? One! So you can see why the drop in the lap times is similar. Also tyre compounds , very different. Pirelli are much faster(softer) tyres they will gain more time with burning the fuel. More than 2-3 sec we witness here. If I am not wrong time difference from empty to full was about 5-6 seconds?

The point discussed here is that somehow Pirelli tires can't be pushed like the Bridgestones. NOBODY questions that they degrade more (and need more pitstops). The issue at hand is whether the Pirellis can deliver laptimes or not, and they evidently can. And I remind you. The 2010 lap was 20 seconds (ie 20% longer ie Bridgestone should be delivering 20% more gain to be as fast as Pirelli)

The other myth is that Pirellis get destroyed after one lap and are never fast again. Here's Vettel's final stint in 2012

I have bolded their respective fastest laps of the race. Let me know the big difference you see, and once again, we don't care the Pirellis did that for 15 laps while the Brickenstones did it for 40. We care if you can push the Brickenstones more. And you can't.

Still, as it is clearly seen your example about Kimi is not correct one. All other stints are very constant, where Kimi lost some time battling in lap 2 and 3. But his real speed is much better that 1:42. 2 that you give for example. So, Dunder is not exactly right. Why you give 2010 stints?

Still, as it is clearly seen your example about Kimi is not correct one. All other stints are very constant, where Kimi lost some time battling in lap 2 and 3. But his real speed is much better that 1:42. 2 that you give for example. So, Dunder is not exactly right.

No Dunder is exactly right, do the math, factor in the 20% longer lap (that should result in a 20% bigger time gain for Bridgestone) and you 'll realize that is no freakin difference

No Dunder is exactly right, do the math, factor in the 20% longer lap (that should result in a 20% bigger time gain for Bridgestone) and you 'll realize that is no freakin difference

Bridgestone are much slower tyre, they use only 2 sets for race, tyres were more used. Pirelli they use 4 sets of tyres. I guess second stint from Bridgestones they used some harder tyre that last 33-34 laps. So any comparison with Bridgestone in this case is useless. About lap times tyre degradation I don't know why you look in the race???? Look in the tests. In race they will not lose 5 sec per stint because they drive by delta. Not pushing 100%. This is the problem ,they managed the degradation, but this is not racing. I put in that thread Nico stints from the test, go find them. It is silly to give example for time lost from the race.Here again:13:44:27 50 1:22.932 -0.278 13:45:33 51 1:23.602 +0.670 13:47:37 52 1:24.588 +0.986 13:48:31 53 1:25.418 +0.830 13:50:33 54 1:25.384 -0.034 13:51:29 55 1:25.750 +0.366 13:52:37 56 1:25.987 +0.237 13:54:27 57 1:25.893 -0.094 13:55:34 58 1:26.273 +0.380 13:57:35 59 1:26.384 +0.111 13:58:35 60 1:26.849 +0.465 14:00:28 61 1:27.094 +0.245 14:01:28 62 1:27.456 +0.362Only in the tests they tried 100% pushing to see how tyres hold. In the race they don't do that. And from here what MS said.Merc times were bad and Ross say ,don't worry we just test the limits. Looking back, we should have worried, but about the limits he is right.

Bridgestone are much slower tyre, they use only 2 sets for race, tyres were more used. Pirelli they use 4 sets of tyres. I guess second stint from Bridgestones they used some harder tyre that last 33-34 laps. So any comparison with Bridgestone in this case is useless. About lap times tyre degradation I don't know why you look in the race???? Look in the tests. In race they will not lose 5 sec per stint because they drive by delta. Not pushing 100%. This is the problem ,they managed the degradation, but this is not racing. I put in that thread Nico stints from the test, go find them. It is silly to give example for time lost from the race.

no clue what you 're talking about. I gave you the numbers above, Vettel in his last stint drove consistently 15 laps, 3+ seconds faster than his race start pace. Alonso/Hamilton on Bridgestones drove a longer lap consistently 3- seconds faster than their race start pace. Is your problem that in 2012 you have to do 15+15 lap stints instead of 1 30 lap stint to get the same speed at the same consistency? Is that your issue? Because the rest of what is said (they lose 5 seconds per stint, they drive a delta) is just not supported by the numbers.

no clue what you 're talking about. I gave you the numbers above, Vettel in his last stint drove consistently 15 laps, 3+ seconds faster than his race start pace. Alonso/Hamilton on Bridgestones drove a longer lap consistently 3- seconds faster than their race start pace. Is your problem that in 2012 you have to do 15+15 lap stints instead of 1 30 lap stint to get the same speed at the same consistency? Is that your issue? Because the rest of what is said (they lose 5 seconds per stint, they drive a delta) is just not supported by the numbers.

I guess you will not get it. Don't worry it is not problem. It is important other to understand it. Read my post again maybe.

Don't get what? your edit about how the Mugello times are more representative than the actual race times? I don't want to offend you so I 'll just leave you to think about it for a second.

It is Barcelona times 03.03.2012. Nico Rosberg. And for 100 time to say, they don't push 100% in the races. They try that only in the test and the result is clear. 4-5 sec in 12 lap stint. 1,6 sec in first 3 laps. You can't expect to see this in the race, teams can't afford it. Or they will do 5-6 pitstops per race. You will find much bigger degradation in the tests. Where they test, in the race they play safe.

No, forget it, I'll tell you: those with big enough / too big gaps to the driver behind / in front will not push to the maximum anymore but just bring the thing home. Different distortions are at work during the first laps when they still sort out the running order. For this argument, what you'd have to look at is, say, lap 3 and lap 54.

Noooo.... Think about what used to happen in the last laps of the races prior to the Pirellis.... You watch this sport or just post about it ?

It is Barcelona times 03.03.2012. Nico Rosberg. And for 100 time to say, they don't push 100% in the races. They try that only in the test and the result is clear. 4-5 sec in 12 lap stint. 1,6 sec in first 3 laps. You can't expect to see this in the race, teams can't afford it. Or they will do 5-6 pitstops per race. You will find much bigger degradation in the tests. Where they test, in the race they play safe.

you have no clue what they are doing in the tests. For all you know these are tyres that have run for 30 laps and they are just running them to the ground for baseline. For all you know Rosberg was testing a setup that wasn't working and was abandoned. Or a part that wasn't working and was abandoned. And your assumption that they are pushing 100% in the tests, sorry, but you have no clue. Most of the tests involve data gathering via sensors NOT pushing. No clue where that romantic notion came from.

What happens in the race is what counts, and I have given you an example from 2 weeks ago where a driver could drive consistently a full stint 3.5 seconds faster that he was driving with full fuel at the start of the race. That's what matter. Not what Rosberg did 3 months ago in Barcelona.

you have no clue what they are doing in the tests. For all you know these are tyres that have run for 30 laps and they are just running them to the ground for baseline. For all you know Rosberg was testing a setup that wasn't working and was abandoned. Or a part that wasn't working and was abandoned. And your assumption that they are pushing 100% in the tests, sorry, but you have no clue. Most of the tests involve data gathering via sensors NOT pushing. No clue where that romantic notion came from.What happens in the race is what counts, and I have given you an example from 2 weeks ago where a driver could drive consistently a full stint 3.5 seconds faster that he was driving with full fuel at the start of the race. That's what matter. Not what Rosberg did 3 months ago in Barcelona.

Ross Brawn said at the test don't look at the time loss in the stints, we push 100%. I believe him , I believe MS when he say something. I am sorry , I don't believe you. You are not F1 driver and TD , so the probability that you are wrong is very high. There many stints with higher degradation in the test, also teams clearly tested what happen when they push at 100%. If you don't want to accept it is not my problem.For drivers there is clear difference between pushing and cruising.

Ross Brawn said at the test don't look at the time loss in the stints, we push 100%. I believe him , I believe MS when he say something. I am sorry , I don't believe you. You are not F1 driver and TD , so the probability that you are wrong is very high. There many stints with higher degradation in the test, also teams clearly tested what happen when they push at 100%. If you don't want to accept it is not my problem.For drivers there is clear difference between pushing and cruising.

Shall we summarize that neither of you knows exactly what and how they test and on top of that you are trying to compare the incomparable. So many variables regarding track, cars and tyres, that any comparison conclusions are pure speculation.
To the liking of the respective side.

Shall we summarize that neither of you knows exactly what and how they test and on top of that you are trying to compare the incomparable. So many variables regarding track, cars and tyres, that any comparison conclusions are pure speculation.To the liking of the respective side.

trends are comparable, indeed they are the fundamental basis of any form of data analysis. But thanks for your contribution

Nonsense. It's a small minority of people complaining about the tires...the racing has been good; China was a fantastic race. David Hobbs is one to never mince words and the man has had nothing but praise for the race craft that happened in China...it's one of the better F1 races we've had in years.

Cars that are running close to each other are setting close to the same times - what a shocker! Drivers having to decide when to push and when not to - based on the circumstance they find themselves in...Kimi trying to two stop and burning up his tires and getting passed by the three stopper cars...oh the HORROR!

It's the same for everybody. It's good for F1...

Tyres have always been an important part of Formula 1. Things were probably a little less punishing in the past to get them right, but now you need to be right there and, if you aren't, it can be quite tricky. Everybody has the same stuff to deal with so you have to get on with it. We just drive the cars and do the best job with what we have. We would all love to have quicker laptimes and extremely consistent tyres like we did in the old days, but that wasn't the most exciting thing for the racing. Trying to find somewhere in the middle is always tricky, but at the moment we have a pretty good show for the crowd. Whether it's by design or not, it's turned out like that.